New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1887-02-01
to get on In tho best way he can without the
mid of Papal electionccring in his favor.
THE CASE OF UNGER.

THE CASE OF UNGER.
The confession OF Unger and the description
in The TRIBUNE Of tho manner in which it
was obtained made a dramatic whole yescr-
day but we wonder how many Of our readers
felt astonished or disqueted by the police ar
rangcments which contributed so largely 10 the
sensationalism of the event. 1t ought to have
occurred to many, and we hope ii
did, that tho methods adopted in this
case, however calculated to work upon the
uneasy mind OF the prisoner, however well
designed to break down his assumed indifler-
encc, wcro foreign to tho American system Of
juri prudence. II is the French Gus ON to lay
t1ars and dig pitfalls for the accused in capital
caes. II is the French custom to subject him
to a judicial examination, in which open menace
and abuse often play q conspicuous part II
Is the French custom TO treat every accIY cd
person as guilty until his innocence has been
proved. But none of the practices has ever
been permitted or justified under English or
American law.
That law is fundamentally at variance with
the Code Napoleon and It's derivatives, and no
where is the divergence wider than in what
relates to tho treatment Of accused per ons and
tho obtaining of comics ions or statements.
Ii was tho duty Of the police to admit
counsel 10 the presence Of tic pr oncr.
Ungcr seems TO have been rgidly deprived of
all professional aid 1t was the police duty
TO let the prisoner alone until he should he
brought before n magistrate for exam nation
or be indicted by the Grand jury. In,tcad Of
this q mclOdramatic, scmi-medi1'al plan was
formed and carried out such plan ~ can bc
found only in Gaboriau's novels. in fact The
weapon with which the crime was committed,
the blood-staincd clothing OF the victim, the
trunk in which the toiy was dIpa chcd to
Baltimore, were employed "a properties - to
hcightcn the effect Of the scene and TO produce
terror and rcmorsc in the pri oncr. There was
shrcwd calculation In tho conception, and it
succeeded but tho most pertinent consideration
is not the effect of the experiment, but the
justification Of it.
Why has the English and American law CON
demncd and forbidden this mode Of examining
and testing and playing upon tho nerves of
accused persons7 Because it opens the
door to emotional and false confessions
and accusations became it introduces
clements Of suspicion which arc intangible, UNI
dcmonstrablc. and therefore tending to con-
fusion, misapprchcnsion and injustice. The
police in this country, moreover. are invested
with no inquiitoial fnc ions or powers, and
II or when they exercise such functions they
ovcrstcD the bounds OF their authority and be-
como offensive Intermediates and lawlc cN
pcrimcnters. In the Gaze Of UDgcr the con-
fo-son. however cXtorted, may ultimately facil-
hate the administration Of justico But it
must re remembered that the law docs not al
low conviction to be based upon such sta g.
ment; and this provision also is n tcstimona
10 tho illegitimacy Of the methods used to pro-
culc the acknowledgment from the guilty man.
II Is clear that tho police must not 10 allowed
TO cncroach thus audaciously upon the sphere Of
the criminal courts. To submit 10 such an
abuse would DC TO encourage an evil, the extent
Of which il would not DO possible 10 estimate.
Tho public can well afford 70 sacrifice an oc-
casional sensational episode but they assurcdly
cannot afford TO condonc any violation OF that
system Of law which is the common defence
and protection against tyranny and oppression.